Sanctions bite-back: Bickering, EU infighting over Russia retaliation

Screen Shot 2014-08-11 at 12.11.54 PM

There is growing dissent in the EU over policies that led to a de fact trade war with Russia. Meanwhile the countries not toeing the line are reaping the benefits, irritating those who jumped on the sanctions bandwagon.

China to start direct sales of fruit and vegetables to Russia

Poland asks US to buy apples banned by Russia

Greek members of the European Parliament demanded Sunday that the EU cancel sanctions against Russia. MEPs Kostantinos Papadakis and Sotiris Zarianopoulos said in a letter to some senior EU officials that Russia’s ban on food import from the EU, which was Moscow’s response to anti-Russian sanctions, was ruinous to Greek agriculture.

“Thousands of small- and middle-sized Greek farms producing fruit and vegetables and selling them primarily to the Russian market have been hit hard now as their unsold products are now rotting at warehouses,” the letter said.

The MEPs are representing the Communist Party of Greece and blame the EU leaders and their own government for supporting what they called “an imperialist intervention by the US, the EU and NATO” in Ukraine at the expense of good relations with Russia.

Greece is one of the EU members hit hardest by the Russian import ban, partially due to its economy still being in turmoil. Greek farmers stand to lose an estimated 200 million euro in direct damages due to Russia’s move, with more long-term consequences expected even if year-long ban is not renewed on expiry. The producers may find it very hard to win back the market share they had before the ban as non-affected countries would certainly weight in.

Head of Austrian Freedom Party (FPOe) Heinz-Christian Strache (Reuters/Heinz-Peter Bader)Head of Austrian Freedom Party (FPOe) Heinz-Christian Strache (Reuters/Heinz-Peter Bader)

Similar sentiments came Sunday from Heinz-Christian Strache, Chairman of the right-wing Freedom Party of Austria, which has 20 percent of seats in the lower chamber of the national parliament and showed similarly strong results in this year’s European parliamentary election.

“In just a few days after the [Russian] sanctions came into force they hurt out agriculture. The EU is thinking on how to mitigate it. Instead of putting Russia on its knees, they drag our farmers to ruin with their senseless sanctions policy,” Strache said ac sited by Austria Presse Agentur.

He also lashed out at Kiev for considering a ban on the transit of Russian gas into Europe to hurt Russia, calling such statements “an affront to their own allies” and “a mockery of the EU,” which will have to save Ukraine from bankruptcy.

He called on the Austrian government to clearly state their policy on the situation.

Who is hit hardest by Russia’s trade ban?

Gregor Gysi, a German parliament member from the Left Party, criticized on Sunday the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel for supporting the sanctions policy, which he called “childish.”

“[US President Barack] Obama talks about economic sanctions all the time, but the response hits us, not the US,” the politician said in an interview with ARD television.

“If we isolate Russia, we will have no influence,” he added. “We must learn to talk to each other again.”

Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves (AFP Photo/Ragio Pajula)Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves (AFP Photo/Ragio Pajula)

The irritation with the damage caused by the sanctions confrontation in Europe comes amid anger towards those who chose not to confront Russia and so were not hit back. Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves lashed out at Switzerland for taking a neutral stance in the conflict, which allows its bankers and traders to profit in the Russian market.

“Switzerland must live with the criticism that it has only dispensed with its own sanctions to gain an advantage for its banking sector,” the Estonian leader said in an interview with Sonntags Zeitung newspaper published on Sunday.

Switzerland, not being an EU member, is not obliged to enforce all anti-Russian sanctions imposed by the union. It took measures last week to ensure that it does not serve as a route to bypass EU’s sanctions, but declined to impose its own.

Bern cited a need to remain neutral, especially since it is now chairing the Organization for Cooperation and Security in Europe, a key mediator in the Ukrainian crisis.

“The concept of neutrality is for me as empty today as ever before,” said Ilves.

The US and its allies have been imposing increasingly tough sanctions against Russia as punishment for its stance in the Ukrainian crisis. They accuse Russia of supporting the armed militia in eastern Ukraine, which is fighting against the Kiev-loyal troops. Moscow accuses the Western countries of hypocrisy, saying they are turning a blind eye to any crimes committed by the Ukrainian regime, which they helped to take over power in the first place.

UK’S CAMERON URGES NATO TO CONFRONT RUSSIA

Screen Shot 2014-08-02 at 6.25.20 PM

PM’s letter comes six weeks before a NATO summit in Wales

LONDON — Aug 2, 2014, 6:51 AM ET
By DANICA KIRKA Associated Press
Associated Press

Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron has called on NATO to rethink its long-term relationship with Russia following its “illegal” actions in Ukraine and strike an agreement on how to sustain a robust presence in Eastern Europe.

In a letter to alliance leaders released Saturday, Cameron said it is clear that Russia views NATO as an adversary and that member states must strengthen their ability to respond quickly to any threat.

“We must accept that the cooperation of recent years is not currently possible because of Russia’s own illegal actions in NATO’s neighborhood and revisit the principles that guide our relationship with Russia,” Cameron said.

His comments follow the release of a report from a British parliamentary committee, which said Russian actions have posed fundamental questions about the alliance’s ability to defend member states.

Recent events in Ukraine, following the cyberattack on Estonia in 2007 and the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008, “have revealed alarming deficiencies in the state of NATO preparedness, which will be tough to fix,” the committee said.

Cameron says that today’s world is more unpredictable as “Russia has ripped up the rulebook with its illegal annexation of Crimea and aggressive destabilization of Ukraine.”

The prime minister’s letter comes six weeks before a NATO summit in Wales, the first such meeting in the U.K. since Margaret Thatcher hosted the alliance 1990 as the Cold War was coming to a close.

IF NUCLEAR WAR DOESN’T EXTERMINATE US EBOLA VIRUS MIGHT

Screen Shot 2014-08-02 at 8.54.21 AM

Unless the world reins in the demented criminals in Washington, the world has signed its own death warrant

by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS | INFOWARS.COM | AUGUST 2, 2014

I just heard on National Public Radio two things that have totally destroyed what tiny bit of belief I still had in American leadership. I have concluded that the term “intelligent American” is an oxymoron.

American elites have decided that Americans are not sufficiently threatened by war and economic chaos, so they are bringing the ebola virus to America. National Public Radio reported that two people infected with the ebola virus, which cannot be cured and is usually deadly, are being brought to Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia.

All it takes is one cough, one sneeze, one drop of saliva, and the virus is loose in one of the main transportation centers of the US.

Pandemic anyone? Little doubt but that most of the world would emit a great sigh of relief to be rid of Washington.

Allegedly the ebola carriers will be quarantined in special rooms. But we already know that American hospitals cannot even contain staph infections. http://rt.com/usa/177408-nightmare-bacteria-antibiotic-southeast/ What happens to the utensils, plates, cups, and glasses with which the ebola infected persons eat and drink? And who gets to clean the bed pans? One slip-up by one person, one tear in a rubber glove, and the virus is loose.

If we don’t die from ebola, we still have to dodge nuclear war. I heard part of Obama’s press conference. Obama accused Putin of doing everything that only Obama is doing.

If Obama believes what he told the press, he is utterly disinformed by his advisors. If he doesn’t believe the crude propaganda that he speaks, he is consciously leading the drive to war with Russia which probably means war with China as well and the end of us all.

Keep in mind that after eight years the US military was unable to successfully occupy Iraq and that after 13 years the US is unable to defeat a few thousand lightly armed Taliban in Afghanistan.

Russia and China are not Iraq, Libya, or Afghanistan.

War with Russia will be nuclear. Washington has prepared for it. Washington has abandoned the ABM treaty, created what it thinks is an ABM shield, and changed its war doctrine to permit US nuclear first strike. All of this is obviously directed at Russia, and the Russian government knows it. How long will Russia sit there waiting for Washington’s first strike?

Russia hasn’t done anything except get in the way, belatedly, of Washington’s lies that Washington uses to start wars. Russia (and China) went along with Washington’s lies about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Russia (and China) went along with Washington’s lies that Washington’s 13-year attempted conquest and occupation of Afghanistan had to do with finding Osama bin Laden. Washington (and China) fell for Washington’s deception that a UN resolution establishing a no-fly zone over Libya was for the purpose of preventing Gaddafi’s air force from bombing his own people, only to discover that Washington misused the resolution to send the NATO air force to overthrow the Libyan government.

When Washington drew a “red line” in the sand with regard to the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons against the outside forces that Washington had organized and sent into Syria to overthrow the government, all the while pretending that these Islamists mercenaries were the true spokesmen for democracy in Syria, most of the world knew that Washington was about to organize a chemical attack and blame Assad. When the Washington orchestrated attack happened on schedule, this time Russia and China did not fall for it. And neither did the British Parliament. Washington was unable to produce any evidence for the charges that Washington made and hoped would bring in at least the British to support Washington’s military assault on Syria. Russia, however, was able to produce evidence, and the evidence foiled Washington’s plot against Syria.

Russia’s intervention angered Washington, as did Russia’s intervention that blocked

Washington’s plot to attack Iran. Washington, devoid of all evidence and in contradiction to the reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency from inspectors on the ground in Iran that there was no diversion of uranium from the legal energy program to a weapons program, had Iran set up for attack. Iran was surrounded by about 40 US military bases and two of Washington’s fleets off its coast.

But in stepped Russia and worked out a deal, which Washington had to accept, that kept Iranian uranium enrichment at the low level used for energy, a level far below weapons requirements.

Two black marks agains Russia whose government prevented wars that Washington wanted. Russia (and China) were supposed to endorse Washington’s lies like the puppet states of Europe, Canada, Australia, and Japan, countries that long ago gave up their sovereignty to Washington.

Unfortunately for Russia, Russia demonstrated that Russia had achieved sufficient power and influence to block Washington’s war plans and, thereby, brought into action against Russia the Wolfowitz Doctrine. I have cited this doctrine in recent columns, but you can google it and read it for yourself. The doctrine is the basis for Washington’s foreign policy and declares that the principle goal of Washington’s foreign policy is to prevent the rise of any country that could serve as a check on Washington’s hegemony over the world. (The doctrine explicitly mentions Russia but also applies to China.)

Washington is disturbed that Russia has twice foiled Washington’s war intentions and that the Parliament of the US Puppet State of Great Britain voted with the Russians.

Washington is also concerned with the growing economic and political relations between Washington’s EU puppet states and Russia. EU countries, especially Germany, have numerous and profitable economic connections with Russia, and all of Europe is dependent on Russian supplied energy.

Washington concluded that Washington was in danger of losing its control over Europe.

While the Russian government was asleep at the switch enjoying the Olympics, Washington pulled off its coup in Kiev.

Neoconservative Victoria Nuland, appointed by Obama as Assistant Secretary of State,

announced at a press conference last December that Washington had spent $5 billion

purchasing fifth column Ukrainian NGOs that can be put into street demonstrations to destabilize a government and on grooming and purchasing Ukrainian politicians who will serve as Washington’s stooges. Nuland, of course, described Washington’s purchase of Ukraine as “furthering democracy” in Ukraine.

Washington’s coup against a democratically elected government brought to power extreme elements that proclaimed their hatred of Jews and Russians. These elements destroyed Russian war memorials erected to remember Russia’s liberation of Ukraine from the Third Reich, passed legislation outlawing Russian as an official language, and engaged in violent physical attacks on the Russian speaking population.

Ukraine has always been an area of changing borders. As some have put it, “Ukraine is a country in search of borders.” When Ukraine was a Soviet province, Soviet leaders attached, for various reasons, traditional Russian provinces to the Ukraine Socialist Soviet Republic. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, pressure from Washington on a weak Russia resulted in the separation of Ukraine from Russia and this included Crimea, a part of Russia since the 1700s and Russia’s warm water port.

The Russian populations in the former Russian territories that Soviet leaders foolishly attached to Ukraine were alarmed by the extreme Russophobia of the government that Washington established in Kiev. The former Russian territories voted to rejoin their mother country and to depart the Russophobic US puppet state established in Kiev.

The Russian government accepted the request from Crimea, but not the requests from the other former Russian provinces in order to demonstrate to Europe that Russia was not provocative and not the source of the crisis. Putin even had the Russian Duma rescind his power to intervene militarily in Ukraine in order to protect the secessionist provinces.

This restraint hurt rather than helped the Russian government’s position. Washington

used its propaganda machine to label self-determination by Crimeans as “invasion and annexation by Russia of Crimea.”

Russia’s restraint with regard to requests to rejoin Russia from the other former Russian provinces resulted in a Washington encouraged military attack by its puppet government in Kiev against the separatist provinces that Russia refused to accept. Washington’s propaganda then succeeded in blaming Russia for the war that Washington launched on the separatist provinces.

Washington is not interested in the truth, and Russia cannot win a propaganda war with Washington which controls the world language, which is English, the language of Washington’s propaganda. The Western media consists of idiots who are enabling Washington’s drive toward war and the extermination of life on earth.

If the Russian government had accepted the separatist provinces request, there would be no war. The Ukrainian government is demented and controlled by Washington, but it is not going to attack territories acknowledged by Russia as its territory.

By showing restraint, Russia has convinced Washington that Russia is weak, and Washington has increased the pressure. Russia has convinced Europe that there is

no cost from Russia to Europe’s complying with Washington’s sanctions. By relying on good will, reasonableness, truth and evidence, Russia has misread Washington and its craven European puppets.

What Obama meant in his White House Press Conference today (August 1) when he said that Putin should use diplomacy–which Putin has been using to no effect–is that Putin should hand Crimea, over the objection of Crimeans and the Russian people, to Washington’s puppet government in Kiev so that Washington can evict Russia from its warm weather port and access to the Mediterranean Sea, thus making redundant Russia’s naval base at Tartus, Syria. Obama also wants Putin to send into the separatist areas of Ukraine, areas that traditionally were part of Russia, Russian military forces to subdue the breakaway territories for Washington’s puppet government in Kiev.

This is Washington’s “diplomatic” position. Only a totally demented person could regard Obama’s position as realistic.

As a person who is considered fair-minded by world media and who arrives at reasonable conclusions independently of Washington’s propaganda, I am often interviewed by foreign as well as US independent media organizations. As of late, the Russian media has turned to me on a number of occasions. What I have learned is that the Russian media is perplexed by Washington’s hostility to Russia.

Russia is not operating in the old Confederate South trying to turn the American South

against Washington for Washington’s rapine, murder, and destruction of the Southern culture, but Washington is operating in the Russian South trying to turn Ukraine, long a part of Russia, against Russia.

As Russians, except perhaps for the government, are unaware of the Wolfowitz Doctrine, they do not know that the main goal of Washington is to prevent the rise of all other powers that could limit Washington’s role as sole Unipower, Hegemon over Earth.

Instead of realizing the real threat, Russian media organizations ask me if the Russian budget can stand responding to sanctions from Washington and the EU by cutting off the energy supply to Europe.

Each time I hear this question I am astonished. Russia can shut down much of European industry and deprive the Europeans of heat in winter, and Russian media ask me if Russia can afford it?

Can Russia afford to be demonized by lies, to be driven into the ground by propagandistic sanctions that will hurt Europe and some US corporations, to convey the

image that Russia is so weak as to be helpless in the face of Western sanctions as to accept the sanctions without demonstrating the cost to Europe and the US?

Does Washington even have Russians brainwashed?

I am concerned about the crisis that Washington has orchestrated, because I believe it is leading to war, which will be nuclear. Are you ready to be destroyed over Washington’s lies about one Malaysian airliner? I am convinced that Washington is behind the destruction of MH-17, because Washington’s propaganda show was already ready and was instantly in performance. That Washington is responsible is the reason that Washington will not release its satellite photos of the area during the moment of the airliner’s destruction. That Washington is responsible is the reason that Washington replies to Russian hard evidence with lies and propaganda. It is Obama and Obama’s stooges in Kiev that refuse to negotiate, not Russia.

Russia has as many nuclear warheads as Washington, and Washington’s “ABM shield” is a farce. If the insane American government drives a crisis, which Washington alone created, to war, we will all die, and for what? The answer is: for a Washington LIE.

Do you want to die for a lie? Another Washington lie?

If you don’t, you had better let Washington know.

Russia cannot end this crisis unless it puts its foot down. I have previously made the case that Russia should take its case to the UN. Alternatively, the Russian government needs to engage Europe in two questions. One is does Europe want its energy supplies from Russia cut off, energy that Washington, despite its lies, cannot replace for 3 or more years if at all.. The other is does Europe want war with Russia and does Europe think that those idiotic countries that host Washington’s missiles won’t be nuked and exterminated?

The crisis in Ukraine will continue to Russia’s and all of humanity’s cost until Russia explains to the stupid, arrogant, hubris-filled West that the West’s criminal and aggressive actions against Russia bear a real cost, and that Russia is prepared to impose the cost.

The propagandized people in the West have no idea of the fate toward which their demented governments are driving them. Russia needs to make it clear to the brainwashed propagandized peoples in the West that Russia is not going to be a puppet state of the West or to accept gratuitous aggression from the White House Fool.

It would help to save life on Earth if China also made this clear.

The sooner the better.

Unless the world reins in the demented criminals in Washington, the world has signed its own death warrant.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts’ latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West and How America Was Lost.

BRITAIN PLANS MAJOR EXERCISES IN POLAND AMID UKRAINE CRISIS

Capture

Largest British contribution to exercises in eastern Europe since 2008

Warsaw (AFP) – Britain on Monday announced major joint manoeuvres in Poland in October, part of a string of NATO exercises in the region aimed at reassuring eastern Europe members jittery over a resurgent Russia.

“I can announce today exercise Black Eagle, which will be a significant Polish and UK armoured exercise with over 350 British armoured and other vehicles and some 1,350 British personnel,” British Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said in Warsaw.

The deployment will be the “largest British contribution to exercises in eastern Europe since 2008,” he said at a joint press conference with British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond and Poland’s foreign and defence ministers.

Ex-communist NATO members have asked the alliance for permanent boots on the ground in the region amid the sharp escalation of fighting between Kiev government troops and pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine.

Presidents from nine ex-communist NATO members met in Warsaw last week to hammer out a regional defence strategy to re-enforce its eastern frontier in preparation for a key summit in September.

The NATO summit is expected to focus largely on the fallout from the Ukraine crisis and Russia’s annexation of that country’s Crimean peninsula.

Senior NATO officials have said decisions on the possible permanent deployment of alliance forces throughout its eastern flank can be expected in September.

“The Russia-Ukraine conflict is Europe’s most important security challenge since the end of the Cold War,” Poland’s President Bronislaw Komorowski has said.

“Strengthening NATO’s eastern flank is fundamental.”

NATO has already sent additional temporary rotations of air, sea and land forces to Poland and three small former Soviet-ruled Baltic states in response to the Ukraine crisis.

US President Barack Obama in June earmarked a billion dollars (741 million euros) in military funding for US allies on NATO’s eastern border.

WASHINGTON IS ESCALATING THE ORCHESTRATED UKRAINIAN “CRISIS” TO WAR

Capture

Washington is escalating the crisis and shepherding it toward war

by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS | INFOWARS.COM | JULY 25, 2014

Despite the conclusion by US intelligence that there is no evidence of Russian involvement in the destruction of the Malaysian airliner and all lives onboard, Washington is escalating the crisis and shepherding it toward war.

Twenty-two US senators have introduced into the 113th Congress, Second Session, a bill, S.2277, “To prevent further Russian aggression toward Ukraine and other sovereign states in Europe and Eurasia, and for other purposes.” https://beta.congress.gov/113/bills/s2277/BILLS-113s2277is.pdf The bill is before the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Note that prior to any evidence of any Russian aggression, there are already 22 senators lined up in behalf of preventing further Russian aggression.

Accompanying this preparatory propaganda move to create a framework for war, hot or cold with Russia, NATO commander General Philip Breedlove announced his plan for a deployment of massive military means in Eastern Europe that would permit lightening responses against Russia in order to protect Europe from Russian aggression.

There we have it again: Russian Aggression. Repeat it enough and it becomes real.

The existence of “Russian aggression” is assumed, not demonstrated. Neither Breedlove nor the senators make any reference to Russian war plans for an attack on Europe or any other countries. There are no references to Russian position papers and documents setting forth a Russian expansionist ideology or a belief declared by Moscow that Russians are “exceptional, indispensable people” with the right to exercise hegemony over the world. No evidence is presented that Russia has infiltrated the communication systems of the entire world for spy purposes. There is no evidence that Putin has Obama’s or Obama’s daughters’ private cell phone conversations or that Russia downloads US corporate secrets for the benefit of Russian businesses.

Nevertheless, the NATO commander and US senators see an urgent need to create blitzkrieg capability for NATO on Russia’s borders.

Senate bill 2277 consists of three titles: “Reinvigorating the Nato Alliance,” “Deterring Further Russian Aggression in Europe,” and “Hardening Ukraine and other European and Eurasian States Against Russian Aggression.” Who do you think wrote this bill? Hint: it wasn’t the senators or their staffs.

Title I deals with strengthening US force posture in Europe and Eurasia and strengthening the NATO alliance, with accelerating the construction of ABM (anti-ballistic missile) bases on Russia’s borders so as to degrade the Russian strategic nuclear deterrent, and to provide more money for Poland and the Baltic states and strengthen US-German cooperation on global security issues, that is, to make certain that the German military is incorporated as part of the US empire military force.

Title II is about confronting “Russian aggression in Europe” with sanctions and with financial and diplomatic “support for Russian democracy and civil society organizations,” which means to pump billions of dollars into NGOs (non-governmental organizations) that can be used to destabilize Russia in the way that Washington used the NGOs it funded in Ukraine to overthrow the elected government. For 20 years Russian government negligence permitted Washington to organize fifth columns inside Russia that pose as human rights organizations, etc.

Title III deals with military and intelligence assistance for Ukraine, putting Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova on a NATO track, expediting US natural gas exports in order to erase European and Eurasian energy dependence on Russia, preventing recognition of Crimea as again a part of Russia, expanding broadcasting (propaganda) into Russian areas, and again “support for democracy and civil society organizations in countries of the former Soviet Union,” which means to use money to subvert the Russian federation.

However you look at this, it comprises a declaration of war. Moreover, these provocative and expensive moves are presented as necessary to counter Russian aggression for which there is no evidence.

How do we characterize a bill that is not merely thoughtless, unnecessary, and dangerous, but also more Orwellian than Orwell? I am open to suggestions.

Ukraine as it currently exists is an ahistorical state with artificial boundaries. Ukraine presently consists of part of what was once a larger entity plus former Russian provinces added to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic by Soviet leaders. When the Soviet Union collapsed and Russia permitted Ukraine’s independence, under US pressure Russia mistakenly permitted Ukraine to take with it the former Russian provinces.

When Washington executed its coup in Kiev last year, the Russophobes who grabbed power began threatening in word and deed the Russian populations in eastern and southern Ukraine. The Crimeans voted to reunite with Russia and were accepted. This reunification was grossly misrepresented by Western propaganda. When other former Russian provinces voted likewise, the Russian government, kowtowing to Western propaganda, did not grant their requests. Instead, Russian president Putin called for Kiev and the former Russian provinces to work out an agreement that would keep the provinces within Ukraine.

Kiev and its Washington master did not listen. Instead, Kiev launched military attacks on the provinces and was conducting bombing attacks on the provinces at the moment the Malaysian airliner was downed.

Washington and its European vassals have consistently misrepresented the situation in Ukraine and denied their responsibility for the violence, instead placing all blame on Russia. But it is not Russia that is conducting bombing raids and attacking provinces with troops, tanks, and artillery. Just as Israel’s current military assault against Palestinian civilians fails to evoke criticism from Washington, European governments, and the Western media, Kiev’s assault on the former Russian provinces goes unreported and uncriticized. Indeed, it appears that few Americans are even aware that Kiev is attacking civilian areas of the provinces that wish to return to their mother country.

Sanctions should be imposed on Kiev, from which the military violence originates. Instead, Kiev is receiving financial and military support, and sanctions are placed on Russia which is not militarily involved in the situation.

When the outbreak of violence against the former Russian provinces began, the Russian Duma voted Putin the power to intervene militarily. Instead of using this power, Putin requested that the Duma rescind the power, which the Duma did. Putin preferred to deal with the problem diplomatically in a reasonable and unprovocative manner.

Putin has received neither respect nor appreciation for encouraging a non-violent resolution of the unfortunate Ukrainian situation created by Washington’s coup against a democratically elected government that was only months away from a chance to elect a different government.

The sanctions that Washington has applied and that Washington is pressuring its European puppets to join send the wrong information to Kiev. It tells Kiev that the West approves and encourages Kiev’s determination to resolve its differences with the former Russian provinces with violence rather than with negotiation.

This means war will continue, and that is clearly Washington’s intent. The latest reports are that US military advisors will soon be in Ukraine to aid the conquest of the former Russian provinces that are in revolt.

The presstitute nature of the Western media ensures that the bulk of the American and European populations will remain in the grip of Washington’s anti-Russian propaganda.

At some point the Russian government will have to face the fact that it doesn’t have “Western partners.” Russia has Western enemies who are being organized to isolate Russia, to injure Russia economically and diplomatically, to surround Russia militarily, to destabilize Russia by calling the American-funded NGOs into the streets, and in the absence of a coup that installs an American puppet in Moscow to attack Russia with nuclear weapons.

I respect Putin’s reliance on diplomacy and good will in the place of force. The problem with Putin’s approach is that Washington has no good will, so there is no reciprocity.

Washington has an agenda. Europe consists of captive nations, and these nations are without leaders capable of breaking free of Washington’s agenda.

I hope that I am wrong, but I think Putin has miscalculated. If Putin had accepted the
former Russian provinces requests to reunite with Russia, the conflict in Ukraine would be over. I am certain that Europe would not have joined Washington in any invasion with the purpose of recovering for Ukraine former provinces of Russia herself. When Washington says that Putin is responsible for downing the Malaysian airliner, Washington is correct in a way that Washington doesn’t suspect. Had Putin completed the task begun with Crimea and reunited the Russian provinces with Russia, there would have been no war during which an airliner could have been downed, whether by accident or as a plot to demonize Russia. Ukraine has no capability of confronting Russia militarily and had no alternative to accepting the reunification of the Russian territories.

Europe would have witnessed a decisive Russian decision and would have put a great distance between itself and Washington’s provocative agenda. This European response would have precluded Washington’s ability to gradually escalate the crisis by gradually turning the temperature higher without the European frog jumping out of the pot.

In its dealings with Washington Europe has grown accustomed to the efficacy of bribes, threats, and coercion. Captive nations are inured to diplomacy’s impotence. Europeans see diplomacy as the weak card played by the weak party. And, of course, all the Europeans want money, which Washington prints with abandon.

Russia and China are disadvantaged in their conflict with Washington. Russia and China have emerged from tyranny. People in both countries were influenced by American cold war propaganda. Both countries have educated people who think that America has freedom, democracy, justice, civil liberty, economic wellbeing and is a welcoming friend of other countries that want the same thing.

This is a dangerous delusion. Washington has an agenda. Washington has put in place a police state to suppress its own population, and Washington believes that history has conveyed the right to Washington to exercise hegemony over the world. Last year President Obama declared to the world that he sincerely believes that America is the exceptional nation on whose leadership the world depends.

In other words, all other countries and peoples are unexceptional. Their voices are unimportant. Their aspirations are best served by Washington’s leadership. Those who disagree–Russia, China, Iran, and the new entity ISIL–are regarded by Washington as obstacles to history’s purpose. Anything, whether an idea or a country, that is in the way of Washington is in the way of History’s Purpose and must be run over.

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries Europe faced the determination of the French Revolution to impose Liberty, Equality, Fraternity upon Europe. Today Washington’s ambition is larger. The ambition is to impose Washington’s hegemony on the entire world.

Unless Russia and China submit, this means war.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. His latest book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West is now available.

NATO Poland base may be prepared for blitz against Russia

Capture

NATO’s Europe commander advocates stockpiling a base in Poland with enough weapons, ammunition and other supplies to support a rapid deployment of thousands of troops against Russia, British media reported.

General Philip Breedlove’s idea would be presented to members of the alliance at the upcoming NATO summit in Wales in September, according to The Times.

The general told a briefing in Naples this week that NATO needed “pre-positioned supplies, pre-positioned capabilities and a basing area ready to rapidly accept follow-on forces.”

NATO’s top commander in Europe General Philip Breedlove (AFP Photo / John Thys)NATO’s top commander in Europe General Philip Breedlove (AFP Photo / John Thys)

Several locations for the future stockpile are planned, with the Multinational Corps Northeast, a base in Szczecin near the Polish-German border being the leading contender.

“It would be a 24/7 fully functioning headquarters that forces could quickly fall in on to respond rapidly when needed,” the British newspaper cites a source familiar with the expected proposition as saying.

Breedlove has been advocating a build-up of NATO assets in Europe, particularly Eastern Europe, in the wake of the Ukrainian crisis in the secession of Ukraine’s Crimea to Russia. The alliance has already strengthened its presence in the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea and deployed additional military aircraft in Eastern Europe. It said the moves were needed to boost the confidence of eastern NATO members in the alliance’s ability to protect them from Russian aggression.

Polish 6 Airborne Brigade soldiers check their weapons as they participate in training exercises with paratroopers from the U.S. Army’s 173rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team at the Land Forces Training Centre in Oleszno near Drawsko Pomorskie, north west Poland May 1, 2014 (Reuters / Kacper Pempel)Polish 6 Airborne Brigade soldiers check their weapons as they participate in training exercises with paratroopers from the U.S. Army’s 173rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team at the Land Forces Training Centre in Oleszno near Drawsko Pomorskie, north west Poland May 1, 2014 (Reuters / Kacper Pempel)

The stockpiling of supplies is just a step short of a permanent massive deployment of foreign NATO troops in Poland. The alliance says it is needed for a rapid response to a Russian incursion, although Russian generals would probably view this as a possible preparation for a blitzkrieg attack on Russia.

Moscow considers the build-up of NATO troops in Europe as part of a hostile policy aimed at placing the alliance’s military resources closer to its borders. Russia’s current military doctrine allows the use of all weapons in its possession, including tactical nuclear weapons, in response to a conventional force attack on Russia.

Obama administration sending military advisers to Ukraine within weeks

Screen Shot 2014-03-01 at 5.13.34 PM

​The United States is reportedly preparing to send a team of military advisers into Ukraine to assist with revamping forces there in the midst of the ongoing crisis between government-loyal troops and an anti-Kiev militia.

On Tuesday this week, the Washington Times reported that a spokesperson for the US Department of Defense confirmed plans to put Pentagon advisers in Ukraine.

“Within the next few weeks, a group of Defense Department representatives who specialize in strategy and policy will head to Kiev to evaluate specific programs that the United States may want to help bolster,” reporter Maggie Ybarra wrote for the Times.

The newspaper says that Army Col. Steve Warren, a spokesperson for the Pentagon, told the Times that the objective of sending DoD advisers overseas is to “shape and establish an enduring program for future US efforts to support the Ukrainian military through subject-matter expert teams and long-term advisers.”

RT reported previously back in early June that US military advisers were being offered to Kiev “to help Ukraine build highly effective armed forces and defense institutions” and to “shape and establish an enduring program for future US efforts to support the Ukrainian military through training, education and assistance.”

Last month’s announcement came after the White House approved more than $23 million security assistance to Ukraine in a matter of weeks. As the crisis in eastern Ukraine intensifies, however, particularly in the aftermath of last week’s tragic plane crash that cost the lives of nearly 300 civilians, the US is once again reportedly offering assistance, this time by way of providing Pentagon advisers.

“Clearly, we have an interest in what happens in Ukraine and it’s far better to have an idea of where we can maximize any support we are willing to provide,” Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-California) told the Times this week.

“It’s important to keep in mind that one of the reasons we’re sending people over there now to help them establish enduring programs is because they don’t have enduring programs,” one defense official told the paper on condition of anonymity. “So two months ago, when they generated their request list, that list wasn’t a result of a well-established defense strategy.”

On Wednesday this week, The Daily Beast went even further by alleging that those earlier requests made by Kiev to the Pentagon were for “sensitive equipment to jam the radars that Russian anti-aircraft systems use to lock their missiles on planes.”

According to Eli Lake at the Beast, a former senior US official said on condition of anonymity that Kiev officials last month specifically “requested the radar jamming and detection equipment necessary to evade and counter the anti-aircraft systems Moscow was providing the country’s separatists.”

Col. Warren, the Pentagon official who confirmed to the Times that DOD advisers were being sent abroad, told the Beast that “The Ukrainian government has requested support, but we’re not going to detail the types of support they have requested.”